review: prevention and reduction of mycotoxin by

ISSN: 0854-6177 Indonesian Food and Nutrition Progress, 2018, Vol. 15, Issue 2

85

Available online at http://journal.ugm.ac.id/jifnp

DOI: http://doi.org/10.22146/ifnp.39607

Indonesian Food and Nutrition Progress, 2018, Vol. 15, Issue 2

Review: Prevention and Reduction of Mycotoxin by Antagonistic Microorganism

Winiati Pudji Rahayu*)

Department of Food Science and Technology, Bogor Agricultural University, Bogor, Indonesia *)Corresponding author, email address: [email protected]

Received 11 October 2018; Accepted 18 January 2019; Published Online 18 January 2019

Abstract Mycotoxin is widely known as one cause of foodborne disease, produced by toxigenic fungi. Any country

should be aware about this high risk potency by knowing the mycotoxin, affected commodities, fungal sources,

and toxicity effect to human or animal. Controlling mycotoxin could be done by physic, chemical, and

biological methods. The microbial characteristic used for biological agent should be evaluated including the

inability to produce toxic substance, tendency to multiply, colonize, survive, safety, and applicability to the

environment. Studies related to mycotoxin biocontrol by using antagonistic microorganism can be focused on

(1) the effect to the mycotoxin, (2) the growth of microorganism, or (3) the application to food both raw

material and processed products. Consideration to combine more than one species of microorganism instead

of a single species also has been taken to achieve more effective result. For example, S. cerevisiae has been

used together with LAB to control certain mycotoxin. Further studies are needed to develop the possibility of

other biological agents and the effect of their application, which in the next have the potency as

manufacturing products.

Keywords: antagonistic microorganism, biological agent, combination, microbial characteristic,

mycotoxin biocontrol, potency

Introduction

Mycotoxin prevalence becomes higher

with the availability of supporting conditions

such as proper climatic changes, plentiful

substrates, and lack of controls. In general,

food and feed are very diverse in microbial

growth substrates, due to variation in:

intrinsic factors such as nutrients, pH,

reduction-oxidation potential, water activity,

antimicrobial components, and biological

structure; and also extrinsic factors such as

storage temperature, equilibrium relative

humidity, and environmental gases. Besides

controlling through regulations, many studies

of controlling mycotoxin have also been done

throughout the world. The using of

antagonistic microorganism or metabolite

compounds produced by microorganism as

biological agent has many advantages, such as

mild reaction conditions, target specificity,

efficiency and environmental friendly.

Available online at http://journal.ugm.ac.id/jifnp

DOI: http://doi.org/10.22146/ifnp.39607

http://journal.ugm.ac.id/jifnp

http://journal.ugm.ac.id/jifnp


86

Principle of Biocontrol by using Antagonistic

Microorganism

Biological control or biocontrol can be

defined as: i) a method of managing pests by

using natural enemies, ii) an ecological

method designed by man to lower a pest or

parasite population to acceptable sub-clinical

densities, iii) to keep parasite populations at

a non-harmful level using natural living

antagonists (Baker, 1987). Biological control

agents act against the pathogen through

different modes of action. Antagonistic

interactions that can lead to biological control

include antibiosis, competition and

hyperparasitism (Bloom et al., 2003; Bull et

al., 2002).

Antibiosis occurs when antibiotics or

toxic metabolites produced by one

microorganism have direct inhibitory effect on

another. Competition occurs when two or

more microorganisms require the same

resources in excess of their supply. These

resources can include living space, nutrients,

and oxygen. In a biological control system, the

more efficient competitor, i.e., the biological

control agent out-competes the less efficient

one, i.e., the pathogen. Hyperparasitism or

predation results from biotrophic or

necrotrophic interactions that lead to

parasitism of the pathogen by the biological

control agent (Bloom et al., 2003; Bull et al.,

2002).

Increasing need of crop protection from

toxigenic fungi attacks have forced scientist as

well as biological and chemical industries to

develop a mass production of biological

control agent. Sharma et al. (2009) showed

some biocontrol products have been

developed to control postharvest diseases

and mycotoxins (Table 1).

Table 1. Biocontrol products developed for control of postharvest diseases and mycotoxins (Sharma et al.,

2009)

Product Microbial agent Food commodity Manufacturer/distributor

AF36 Aspergillus flavus AF36 Corn and cotton Arizona Cotton Research and Protection Council, USA

Afla-guad A. flavus strain NRRL21882

Peanuts and corn Syngenta Crop Protection, USA

AQ-10 biofungicide Ampelomyces quisquolis Cesati ex Schlechtendahl

Apples, grapes, strawberries, tomatoes, and cucurbits

Ecogen, Inc., USA

Aspire Candida oleophila strain 1-182

Apple, pear, citrus, cherries, and potatoes

Ecogen, Inc., USA

Biosave 10LP, 110 Pseudomonas syringae (strain 10 LP, 110)

Apple, pear, strawberries, and potatoes

Eco Science Corporation, USA

Blight Ban A 506 Pseudomonas fluorescence A506

Onion Nu Farm, Inc., USA

Contains WG, Intercept WG

Coniothyrium minitans Campbell

Vegetables Prohyta Biologischer, Germany

Messenger Erwinia amylovora (Burrill) Winslow et al.

Vegetables EDEN Bioscience Corporation, USA

Rhio-plus Bacillus subtilis FZB 24 Potatoes and other vegetables

KFZB Biotechnik, Germany

Serenade B. subtilis Apple, pear, grapes, and vegetables

Agro Quess, Inc., USA


87

Figure 1. Factors involved in the development of a biocontrol product (Droby et al., 2009)

Droby et al. (2009) extended

information about characteristics of an ideal

postharvest antagonist for commercial

development, such as: genetically stable,

effective at low concentration, not fastidious

in its nutrient requirements, able to survive

adverse environmental conditions, effective

against a wide range of pathogens on

different commodities, amenable to

production on inexpensive growth media,

amenable to formulation with a long shelf-life,

easy to dispense, resistant to chemicals used

in the postharvest environment, not

detrimental to human health, and compatible

with commercial processing procedures.

Scientist should consider the factors involved

in the development of a biocontrol product

(Figure 1). Among the important factors to

consider are: (1) biosafety of the selected

antagonist, (2) patent potential, (3) growth

requirements and shelf life, (4) range of

activity (commodities and pathogens), and (5)

ease of use. If any of these factors are of

concern, one may want to abandon further

development despite the efficacy of the

selected antagonist.

Studies of Antagonistic Microorganism for

Mycotoxin Biocontrol

Utilization of microorganism by using

their enzymatic metabolites to detoxify

mycotoxins in food and feed has advantages

such as mild reaction conditions, target

specificity, efficiency and environmental

friendly. The microorganism must be

evaluated for a set of selection criteria for

further use in biocontrol field experiments.

Inability to produce toxic substances for

biological systems and propensity to multiply,

colonize and survive are the most important

selection criteria to make sure that the

selected antagonistic microorganism strains

are safe and applicable when they introduced

into the environment. The biocontrol of

mycotoxin which is discussed in this review

are including aflatoxin (AF), ochratoxin A

(OTA), patulin (PAT), and fumonisin

biocontrol.

1. Aflatoxin biocontrol

Aflatoxins is a group of mycotoxins

which is mainly produced by certain strains of

Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus. Its

association with various diseases, occurrence


88

which is caused by several factors and its

potency of carcinogenic effect as well as its

acute toxicological effect bring this mycotoxin

to be probably the famous and the most

intensively studied mycotoxin throughout the

world. Aflatoxin can be naturally found in

some foods including grains or cereals, spices,

nuts, dried fruit, even in processed food such

as breakfast cereals.

The effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae

RC008 and RC016 strains, previously selected

based on their AFB1 mycotoxin binding ability

and beneficial properties, against Aspergillus

carbonarius and Fusarium graminearum

under different interacting environmental

conditions was evaluated by Armando et al.

(2013). In vitro studies on the lag phase,

growth rate and ochratoxin A/zearalenone

and DON production were carried out under

different regimens of aW (0.95 and 0.99); pH

(4 and 6); temperature (25 and 37 °C) and

oxygen availability (normal and reduced).

Both yeast strains showed antagonistic

activity and decreasing growth rate compared

to the control. In general, the RC016 strain

showed the greatest inhibitory activity. Except

at the interacting condition 0.95 aW, normal

oxygen availability and 37 °C, at the both pH

values, A. carbonarius and F. graminearum

were able to produce large amounts of

mycotoxins in vitro. In general, a significant

decrease in levels of mycotoxins in

comparison with the control was observed. S.

cerevisiae RC008 and RC016 could be

considered as effective agents to reduce

growth and OTA, ZEA and DON production at

different interacting environmental

conditions, related to those found in stored

feedstuff. The beneficial and biocontrol

properties of these strains are important in

their use as novel additives for the control of

mycotoxigenic fungi in stored feedstuffs.

Bacteria and the metabolites have been

widely introduced to be biocontrol agent

against aflatoxigenic fungi; even it has been

developed into commercial product. Bacillus

subtilis, for example, was first introduced as

an inhibitor of growth and AF production of

aflatoxigenic fungi and the effective

compound, iturin A, had been patented for

the control of AF in nuts and cereals (Kimura

& Hirano, 1988). A strain of marine Bacillus

megaterium had been studied by Kong et al.

(2010) as a biocontrol of A. flavus on peanut

kernels. The degradation of another type of

aflatoxins, Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) by Bacillus

subtilis UTB SP1 isolated from pistachio nuts

had been investigated by Farzaneh et al.

(2012).

Shams-Ghahfarokhi et al. (2013)

suggested terrestrial bacteria from

agricultural soils as versatile weapons against

aflatoxigenic fungi. There are some important

limitations from the type of vegetative

compatibility groups which shows the

progeny of the fungus for AF-producing ability

to geographic limitations in selection of

atoxigenic strains. Considerable tolerance of

B. subtilis and P. chlororaphis to

environmental stresses, their large capacity

for producing diverse array of beneficial

antifungal metabolites and their readily

producing by current fermentation technology

make them promising tools for biocontrol of

aflatoxigenic fungi in practice. Bacterial

population from the genera Bacillus and

Pseudomonas identified in pistachio, maize

and peanut fields in the present study with

potent antagonistic activity against

aflatoxigenic Aspergillus parasiticus can

potentially be developed into new biocontrol

agents for combating AF contamination of

crops in the field.

Examples of aflatoxin biocontrol agent

are Afla-Guard and AF36. This product

consists of nontoxigenic strains of A. flavus

which does not produce aflatoxin. The

nontoxigenic strain of A. flavus was


89

investigated for its biocontrol activity against

the toxigenic strains. Selection of A. flavus

isolates was made for biological control of

aflatoxins in corn. Dorner (2009) applied

nontoxigenic A. flavus to control AF

contamination in corn. Abbas et al. (2011)

studied three non-aflatoxigenic strains of A.

flavus which are A. flavus strain NRRL 21882

(Afla-Guard), K49, and AF36 compared in side

by side field trials to evaluate their safety and

efficacy in controlling both aflatoxin and

cyclopiazonic acid (CPA) in corn. The result

showed that A. flavus strain NRRL 21882 and

K49 did not produce CPA, whereas AF36

controls the production of aflatoxins, but also

produces CPA, which is a concern for the

safety of crop products to be used livestock

feed and human food. The effect in other crop

has been studied by Zanon et al. (2013) who

suggested the using the strategy of

competitive exclusion A. flavus AFCHG2 can

be applied to reduce aflatoxin contamination

in Argentinean peanuts.

Corassin et al. (2013) studied

application of yeast combined with bacteria to

bind aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) in UHT (ultra-high-

temperature) milk. They evaluated the ability

of a S. cerevisiae and three LAB strains

(Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus

delbrueckii spp. bulgaricus and

Bifidobacterium lactis), alone or in

combination, to bind aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) in

UHT skim milk spiked with 0.5 ng AFM1 mL-1.

All the LAB pool (1010 cells mL-1) and S.

cerevisiae (109cells mL-1) cells were heat-

killed (100°C, 1 h) and then used for checking

the effect of contact time (30 or 60 min) on

toxin binding in skim milk at 37°C. The mean

percentages of AFM1 bound by the LAB pool

in milk were 11.5±2.3 and 11.7±4.4 % for 30

and 60 minutes. Compared to the LAB pool, S.

cerevisiae cells had higher capability to bind

AFM1 in milk (90.3±0.3 and 92.7±0.7% for 30

and 60 min, respectively), although there

were not significant differences between the

contact times evaluated. S. cerevisiae and LAB

pool, a significant increase was observed in

the percentage of AFM1 bound (100.0%)

during 60 minutes. It is apparent that

bacterial viability is not a prerequisite for

removal of AFM1 by LAB. Non-viable cells of S.

cerevisiae and LAB strains may be useful for

completely removing AFM1 from milk

containing up to 0.5 ng mL-1, without any

changes in the flavor or acidity of milk caused

by fermentation. Additional studies are

needed to investigate the mechanisms

involved in the removal process of toxin by S.

cerevisiae and/or LAB and the factors that

affect the stability of the toxin sequestration

aiming the commercial application in the dairy

industry.

2. OTA biocontrol

Produced by several species of

Aspergillus and Penicillium, Ochratoxin A

(OTA) as the most economically important

ochratoxin type is the most toxic form of

ochratoxin and commonly found in several

kinds of crop. OTA contamination generally

occurred in cereal grains, grapes, coffee, tree

nuts, and figs. Microorganisms which have

been used for OTA biocontrol study can be

categorized into yeast and bacteria. In the

yeast group, there are some species which has

been known to have activity in controlling

OTA such as Trichosporon mycotoxinivorans,

Aureobasidium pullulans, Debaryomyces

hansenii, Saccharomyces cerevisiae,

Kluyveromyces thermotolerans, and

Metschnikowia pulcherrima.

Trichosporon mycotoxinivorans is yeast

which has been developed as a commercial

product for detoxifying OTA in animal feed

(Molnar et al. 2004). In the other research,

this species also presented the ability to

decarboxylate ZEA (Molnar et al. 2004; Vekiru

et al. 2010). Aureobasidium pullulans was


90

used as a biocontrol agent in wine, preventing

OTA accumulation in grapes and decreasing

aspergillosis symptoms (De Felice et al. 2008).

Reduction of OTA produced by Aspergillus

westerdijkiae by using Debaryomyces hansenii

CYC 1244 had been studied by Gil-serna et al.

(2011). S. cerevisiae also has been promoted

as commercial product in case of mycotoxin

biocontrol. Velmourougane et al. (2011)

inoculated S. cerevisiae to manage A.

ochraceus and OTA contamination in coffee

during on-farm processing. Ponsone et al.

(2011) applied biocontrol as a strategy to

reduce the impact of OTA and Aspergillus

section Nigri in grapes by using

Kluyveromyces thermotolerans in preventing

the growth and OTA accumulation both in

vitro and in situ. Environmental factors also

need to be studied especially about the

affection towards the activity of biocontrol

agents against ochratoxigenic Aspergillus

carbonarius on wine grape (De Curtis et al.

2012).

In the group of bacteria, detoxification

of OTA was done by Fuchs et al. (2008). The

study used lactic acid bacteria (LAB) such as

Lactobacilli, Bifidobacteria, and Streptococci

to control OTA as well as PAT. The findings

showed that Lactobacillus acidophilus VM 20

caused a decrease of OTA by ≥95%.

Comparison between bacteria and yeast

performed as composites also had been

studied by Kapetanakou et al. (2012) to inhibit

Aspergillus carbonarius growth and reduce

OTA. Composites of 16 yeasts (16YM) and 29

bacterial (29BM) strains (107 cfu/mL) to

estimate the kinetics of OTA reduction at 25°C

for 5 days. The yeast composites were YM1

(Hanseniaspora guilliermondii, Kluyveromyces

dobzhankii, Pichia fermentas, Issatchekia

occidentalis), YM2 (Metschnikowia

pulcherrima, Hanseniaspora uvarum,

Issatchenkia terricola, Zygosaccharomyces

bailii), YM3 (Zygosaccharomyces bailii,

Kazachstania hellenica, Hanseniaspora

opuntiae), YM4 (Saccharomyces cerevisiae,

Pichia guilliermondii, Lachencea

thermotolerans, Issatchenkia orientalis), and

16YM (all of the yeast strains). The result

showed that none of the bacteria composites

inhibited A. carbonarius growth. However, the

high inoculum of yeast composites (105

cfu/mL) showed more efficient fungal

inhibition compared to cell density of 102

cfu/mL. All yeast composites showed higher

OTA reduction (up to 65%) compared to

bacteria (2–25%), at all studied assays.

3. Patulin biocontrol

Patulin (PAT) is mycotoxins mainly

produced by certain species of Penicillium,

Aspergillus, and Byssochylamys. PAT is able to

contaminate several varieties of foods such as

fruits, grains, and cheese. The possibility of

PAT occurrence in raw food, manufacturing

processes, or consumption practices can

emerge food safety concern. Similar to the

other mycotoxins, PAT biocontrol involves

yeast and bacteria to cope toxigenic fungi

growth and its produced PAT.

Biocontrol activity of yeast against both

Penicillium expansum contamination and PAT

production had been studied by Tolaini et al.

(2010) by applying Cryptococcus laurentii in

apple fruits. A modification was applied to

achieve the effective result of biocontrol

activity by using Lentinula edodes in order to

enhance the biocontrol activity of

Cryptococcus laurentii. Lima et al. (2011)

studied integrated control of blue mould using

new fungicides and biocontrol yeasts lowers

levels of fungicide residues and PAT

contamination in apples. Another yeast strain,

a new strain of Metschnikowia fructicola,

was studied by Spadaro et al. (2013) for

controlling Penicillium expansum as well as

its PAT accumulation on four cultivars of

apple.


91

Application of yeast as antagonistic

microorganism in apples by using Pichia

caribbica to control blue mold rot and PAT

degradation had been studied by Cao et al.

(2013). The decay incidence of the blue mold

of apples treated by P. caribbica was

significantly reduced compared with the

control samples. The higher the concentration

of P. caribbica, the better the efficacy of the

biocontrol. Germination of spores and growth

of P. expansum were markedly inhibited by P.

caribbica in in vitro testing. After incubation

with P. caribbica at 20°C for 15 days, PAT

produced by P. expansum in apples was

significantly reduced, compared to the

control. In vitro testing indicated that P.

caribbica can degrade PAT directly.

Fuchs et al. (2008) used lactic acid

bacteria (LAB) such as Lactobacilli,

Bifidobacteria, and Streptococci to control

PAT as well as OTA. The findings showed that

Bifidobacterium animalis VM 12 reduced PAT

levels by 80%. To proof that the decrease of

the toxins by LAB from liquid medium results

in a reduction of their toxic properties,

micronucleus (MCN) assays were conducted

with a human derived hepatoma cell line

(HepG2). Indeed, a substantial decrease (39–

59%) of OTA and PAT induced MCN formation

was observed with the most effective strains

detected in the chemical analyses.

Furthermore, also the inhibition of the cell

division rates by the toxins was significantly

reduced. These findings indicate that certain

LAB strains are able to detoxify the two toxins

and may be useful to protect humans and/or

animals against the adverse health effects of

these compounds.

4. Fumonisin biocontrol

Fumonisins are produced primarily by

several species of Fusarium which widely

spread and contaminate several crops, mainly

maize. Fumonisin B1 (FB1) is the most

common and economically important form of

fumonisin. Maize is the most commonly crop

contaminated by fumonisins.

Affection of yeast to fumonisin

biosynthesis of F. verticillioides had been

studied by Dalié et al. (2012) by implementing

Pediococcus pentosaceus strain L006 and its

metabolites. Some extracellular metabolites

produced in MRS medium by the P.

pentosaceus strain L006 were able to

significantly reduce fumonisin production in

liquid medium as well as on maize kernels.

Fumonisin yields by F. verticillioides

inoculated on autoclaved maize kernels were

reduced by 75 to 80% after 20 days of

incubation. Further similar studies should be

aimed that the use of an antagonistic bacterial

agent is not only to manage fumonisin

contamination, but also emphasizing the

potential use of bacterial metabolites to

counteract fumonisin accumulation in kernels.

Application of yeast as biological

control agent against Fusarium and its

mycotoxin also has been widely studied. To

control Fusarium molds growth as well as its

FB1 production in maize seeds, Fareid (2011)

used Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a biocontrol

agent. The result showed that the growth of

Fusarium moniliforme was negatively

correlated with different doses of S.

cerevisiae while detoxification was positively

correlated with the doses. This means that by

addition of S. cerevisiae, the growth of F.

moniliforme was significantly decreased and

the percentage of FB1 detoxification was

significantly increased gradually.

Application of bacteria to control

fumonisins in maize has showed positive

effect. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and

Enterobacter hormaechei were used as

bacterial agents in reducing the infection pf

Fusarium verticilloides and FB1 contents

(Pereira et al. 2010). The findings showed that

the number of colony forming units of F.


92

verticillioides obtained from harvested maize

kernels was positively correlated with

fumonisin B1 content. Therefore, the scientist

also studied the impact of Microbacterium

oleovorans and B. amyloliquefaciens as

antagonist to F. verticilloides on maize

seedlings growth and antioxidative enzymatic

activities (Pereira et al. 2011).

Mechanism of Biocontrol

From the above studies, the mechanism

of mycotoxin biocontrol occurred through: (i)

microbial growth inhibition, (ii) mycotoxin

binding, (iii) mycotoxin detoxification, (iv)

mycotoxin adsorption, and (v) enzymatic

degradation.

The restrictiveness of living spaces as

well as substrate nutrients is suggested as the

cause of microbial growth inhibition through

competition. Other microorganisms show the

antagonistic activity by inhibiting fungal spore

germination. Degradation of aflatoxin content

also has been investigated as the effect of its

nontoxigenic strains growth, even the other

toxigenic strains. These strains develop

mycelium until it is ready to reach lysis.

Scientist agreed the possibility of aflatoxin

damaging components which are produced by

the leakage. Investigation of OTA degradation

as well as inhibiting its fungal strains leads to

positive result. Antagonistic microorganism

has ability to inhibit the growth of A.

ochraseus mycelium, the forming of OTA, or

to metabolize OTA into nontoxigenic form.

Aflatoxin binding by bacteria generally

existed in physical properties and was

hypothesized by the occurrence of a physical

union to the cell wall components

(polysaccharides and peptidoglycans) instead

of a covalent binding or degradation by the

microorganism metabolism (Corassin et al.

2013). Fuchs et al. (2008) concluded that

subsequently experiments showed that the

binding of PAT and OTA compounds depends

on different parameters, i.e. the

concentration of toxins, the cell density, the

pH-value and the viability of the bacteria.

Detoxification is defined as any

treatments working against toxins in food or

feed in order to lowering the content.

Detoxification process can be categorized into

three different ways, which is by physical,

chemical, and biological treatments. In the

real applications, it could be more than one

method of detoxification treatments which

are used for controlling fungal and mycotoxin

contamination. One of biological

detoxification is by appearing fermentation

process. Studies show the ability of

antagonistic microorganisms to perform

fermentation process in order to decrease

certain mycotoxins content.

One of the strategies for reducing

the exposure to mycotoxins is to decrease

their bioavailability by including various

mycotoxin adsorbing agents in food or feed,

which leads to a reduction of mycotoxin

uptake as well as distribution to the blood

and the target organs. Guo et al. (2013)

suggested that mycotoxin adsorption by

biosorbent microorganism such as yeast

generally has lower cost than clarification,

filtration, or chemical addition. The

biosorbent microorganism is supported by the

proper pretreatment for the yeast and the

acidity (pH) of the environment.

Gil-serna et al. (2011) studied OTA

biosynthesis which was evaluated by

quantification of expression levels of pks

(polyketide synthase) and p450-B03

(cytochrome p450 monooxygenase) genes

using newly developed and specific real time

RT-PCR protocols. Both genes showed

significant lower levels in presence of D.

hansenii CYC 1244 suggesting an effect on

regulation of OTA biosynthesis at

transcriptional level. High levels of removal of

extracellular OTA were observed by


93

adsorption to yeast cell walls, particularly at

low pH (98% at pH 3). Another research about

PAT degradation was studied by Guo et al.

(2013), focusing on the biosorption of PAT

from apple juice by caustic treated cider yeast

biomass. The results showed that the

adsorption percentage of PAT increased

simultaneously with the increase of pH and

approached equilibrium at pH 4.5. The

removal of PAT increased with decreasing of

toxin levels. The experimental data were

analyzed using the Langmuir and Freundlich

equations. The Langmuir constants were

qmax (mg/g) = 8.1766 and b (L/mg) = 0.0640.

In packed bed column studies, it was found

that Ca-alginate gel was a good biosorbent for

PAT removal and immobilized caustic treated

yeast particles in the gel increased the

biosorption capacity of the gel. Pizzolitto et al.

(2012) analyzed the removal of FB1 by

microorganism in co-occurrence with aflatoxin

B1 and the nature of the adsorption process.

The team evaluated the ability of S. cerevisiae

CECT 1891 and L. acidophilus 24 to remove

fumonisin B1 (FB1) from liquid medium. The

removal process was proven to be fast and

reversible which made the FB1 molecules was

not experienced any chemical modification.

The main thing which is required of FB1

removal is the structural integrity of

microorganism’s cell wall. The mechanism

involved in the removal of FB1 is a physical

adsorption (physisorption) of the toxin

molecule to cell wall components of the

microorganism. Studies of co-occurrence of

both mycotoxins clearly showed that they did

not compete for binding sites on the

microorganism’s cell wall and the presence of

one toxin did not modify the efficiency of the

organism in the removal of the other

mycotoxin.

Some microorganisms have ability to

produce cell wall-degrading enzymes that will

eliminate the other competitor

microorganism. One of the biocontrol roles of

enzyme is as biotransforming or

biodegradating agent. Biotransforming agents

becomes another strategy performing the

degradation of mycotoxins into non-toxic

metabolites by using bacteria/fungi or

enzymes. The other way is by blocking the

biosynthesis way of mycotoxin. Enzymes are

not always performing as catalisator in

metabolic pathway. Researchers are carrying

out to study the impact of enzymes from

antagonistic microorganism to the mycotoxin

production. During the growth of the

antagonistic microorganisms, specific

metabolites should be produced which affect

the growth of mycotoxigenic fungi. Enzymatic

reaction also occurred in fermentation

process. Therefore, the implementation of

yeast and bacteria, especially LAB, to control

mycotoxin contamination can be linked to the

role of fermentation. S. cerevisiae has been

used in many researches of aflatoxin, OTA,

ZEA, DON, and fumonisin biocontrol, whereas

LAB has been applied in research of aflatoxin,

PAT, and OTA biocontrol.

Conclusion

The presence of mycotoxin as a threat

for food safety and security is considerably

serious problem for human life. Produced by

microorganism (fungi), mycotoxin fortunately

can be controlled by implementing the role of

other microorganism and or its metabolites.

Studies have suggested antagonistic

microorganism as a safe and efficient

biocontrol agent to decrease mycotoxin

content. The various modes of actions as well

as the mechanisms make the efforts of

mycotoxin prevention and reduction into

many alternative ways. More developed

scientific studies regarding these properties

need to be conducted in order to select which

agents are applicable and suggested to have

high possibility in controlling mycotoxin.


94

References

Abbas, H.K., Weaver, M.A., Horn, B.W.,

Carbone, I., Monacell, J.T., and Shier,

W.T. 2011. Selection of Aspergillus

flavus isolates for biological control of

aflatoxins in corn. Toxin Reviews. 30(2-

3):59-70.

https://doi.org/10.3109/15569543.201

1.591539

Armando, M.R., Dogi, C.A., Poloni, V., Rosa,

C.A.R., Dalcero, A.M., and Cavaglieri,

L.R. 2013. In vitro study on the effect of

Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains on

growth and mycotoxin production by

Aspergillus carbonarius and Fusarium

graminearum. International Journal of

Food Microbiology. 161:182-188. http:

//dx. doi.org /10.1016 / j.ijfoodmicro .

2012.11.016

Baker, KF. 1987. Evolving concepts of

biological control of plant pathogens.

Annual Review of Phytopathology.

25:67-85. http://

doi:10.1146/annurev.py.25.090187.000

43

Bloom, B., Ehlers, R., Haukeland-Salinas, S.,

Hoddanen, H., and Jung, K. 2003.

Biological control agents: Safety and

regulatory policy. BioControl.

48(4):477-484. https://doi.Org/ 10

.1023/A:1024718225391

Bull, CT., Shetty, KG., and Subbarao, KV. 2002.

Interactions between myxobacteria,

plant pathogenic fungi and biocontrol

agents. Plant Disease. 86:889-896.

http:// dx.doi.org /10

.1094/PDIS.2002.86.8.889

Cao, J., Zhang, H., yang, Q., Ren, R. 2013.

Efficacy of Pichia caribbica in controlling

blue mold rot and patulin degradation

in apples. International Journal of Food

Microbiology. 162:167-173.

http://doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2013.0

1.007

Corassin, C.H., Bovo, F., Rosim, R.E., Oliveira,

C.A.F. 2013. Efficiency of

Saccharomyces cerevisiae and lactic

acid bacteria strains to bind aflatoxin

M1 in UHT skim milk. Food Control.

31:80-83.

Dalié, D., Pinson-Gadais, L., Atanasova-

Penichon, V., Marchegay, G., Barreau,

C., Deschamps, A., and Richard-Forget,

F. 2012. Impact of Pediococcus

pentosaceus strain L006 and its

metabolites on fumonisin biosynthesis

by Fusarium verticillioides. Food

Control. 23:405-411. http://DOI:

10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.08.008

De Curtis, F., de Felice, D.V., Ianiri, G., De

Cicco, V., and Castoria, R. 2012.

Environmental factors affect the activity

of biocontrol agents against

ochratoxigenic Aspergillus carbonarius

on wine grape. International Journal of

Food Microbiology. 159:17-24.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2

012.07.023.

De Felice, D. V., Solfrizzo, M., De Curtis, F.,

Lima, G., Visconti, A., and Castoria, R.

2008. Strains of Aureobasidium

pullulans can lower ochratoxin A

contamination in wine grapes.

Postharvest pathology and Mycotoxins.

98(12):1261-1270. https://apsjournals.

Apsnet .org /doi /pdf/10.1094/PHYTO-

98-12-1261

Dorner, JW. 2009. Biological control of

aflatoxin contamination in corn using a

nontoxigenic strain of Aspergillus

flavus. Journal of Food Protection.

72(4):801-804. https:// pubag .nal .usda

.gov/download/29031/PDF

Droby, S., Wisniewski, M., Macarisin, D., and

Wilson, C. 2009. Review: Twenty years

of postharvest biocontrol research: Is it

time for a new paradigm? Postharvest

Biology and Technology. 52:137-145.


95

https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/2

8805/PDF

Fareid, MA. 2011. Biocontrol of Fusarium

moulds and fumonisin B1 production.

World Rural Observations. 3(3):53-61.

Fuchs, S., Sontag, G., Stidl, R., Ehrlich, V.,

Kundi, M., and Knasmuller, S. 2008.

Detoxification of patulin and ochratoxin

A, two abundant mycotoxins, by lactic

acid bacteria. Food and Chemical

Toxicology. 46:1398-1407.

http://doi:10.1016/j.fct.2007.10.008.

Gil-Serna, J., Patiño, B., Cortés, L., González-

Jaén, MT., and Vázquez, C. 2011.

Mechanisms involved in reduction of

ochratoxin A produced by Aspergillus

westerdijkiae using Debaryomyces

hansenii CYC 1244. International

Journal of Food Microbiology. 151:113-

118.


011.08.012

Guo, C., Yue, T., Yuan, Y., Wang, Z., Guo, Y.,

Wang, L., and Li, Z. 2013. Biosorption of

patulin from apple juice by caustic

treated waste cider yeast biomass.

Food Control. 32:99-104.

https://doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.11

.009

Kapetanakou, A.E., Kollias, J.N., Drosinos, E.H.,

and Skandamis, P.N. 2012. Inhibition of

A. carbonarius growth and reduction of

ochratoxin A by bacteria and yeast

composites of technological importance

in culture media and beverages.

International Journal of Food



011.09.010

Kimura, N. and Hirano, S. 1988. Inhibitory

strains of Bacillus subtilis for growth

and aflatoxin production of aflatoxin

production of aflatoxigenic fungi.

Agricultural and Biological Chemistry.

52(5):1173-1179. https://DOI:

10.1271/bbb1961.52.1173

Kong, Q., Shan, S., Liu, Q., Wang, X., and Yu, F.

2010. Biocontrol of Aspergillus flavus on

peanut kernels by use of a strain of

marine Bacillus megaterium.




010.01.036

Lima, G., Castoria, R., De Curtis, F., Raiola, A.,

Ritieni, A., and De Cicco, V. 2011.

Integrated control of blue mould using

new fungicides and biocontrol yeasts

lowers levels of fungicide residues and

patulin contamination in apples.

Postharvest Biology and Technology.

60:164-172.

https://doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2010.

12.010.

Molnar, O., Schatzmayr, G., Fuchs, E., and

Prillinger, H. 2004. Trichosporon

mycotoxinivorans sp nov., a new yeast

species useful in biological

detoxification of various mycotoxins.

Systematic and Applied Microbiology.

27(6):661–671. https: //doi .org /10

.1078 /0723202042369947

Pereira, P., Ibánez, SG., Agostini, E., and

Etcheverry, M. 2011. Effects of maize

inoculation with Fusarium

verticillioides and with two bacterial

biocontrol agents on seedlings

growth and antioxidative enzymatic

activities. Applied Soil Ecology. 51:52-

59. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2011.08.007.

Pereira, P., Nesci, A., Castillo, C., and

Etcheverry, M. 2010. Impact of bacterial

biological control agents on fumonisin

B1 content and Fusarium verticillioides

infection of field-grown maize.

Biological Control. 53:258-266. doi:

10.1016/j.biocontrol.2010.02.001


96

Pizzolitto, RP., Salvano, MA.,and Dalcero, AM.

2012. Analysis of fumonisin B1 removal

by microorganisms in co-occurrence

with aflatoxin B1 and the nature of the

binding process. International Journal

of Food Microbiology. 156:214-221.

https:// doi:10 .1016 /j. ijfood

micro.2012.03.024

Ponsone, ML., Chiotta, ML., Combina, M.,

Dalcero, A., and Chulze, S. 2011.

Biocontrol as a strategy to reduce the

impact of ochratoxin A and Aspergillus

section Nigri in grapes. International

Journal of Food Microbiology. 151:70-

77. https: //doi .org /10 .1016 /j.ij food

micro.2011.08.005

Shams-Ghahfarokhi, M., Kalantari, S., and

Razzaghi-Abyaneh, M. 2013. Terrestrial

bacteria from agricultural soils: versatile

weapons against aflatoxigenic fungi. In

“Aflatoxin-recent advances and future

prospects”. ed. M. Razzaghi-Abyaneh,

pp. 23-39. Intech, Rijeka.

https://doi:10.5772/45918

Sharma, RR., Singh, D., and Singh, R. 2009.

Biological control of postharvest

diseases of fruits and vegetables by

microbial antagonists: A review.

Biological Control. 50:205-221.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.20

09.05.001

Spadaro, D., Lorè, A., Garibaldi, A., and

Gullino, ML. 2013. A new strain of

Metschnikowia fructicola for

postharvest control of Penicillium

expansum and patulin accumulation

on four cultivars of apple.

Postharvest Biology and Technology.

75:1-8.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2

012.08.001

Tolaini, V., Zjalic, S., Reverberi, M., Fanelli, C.,

Fabbri, A.A., Del Fiore, A., De Rossi, P.,

and Ricelli, A. 2010. Lentinula edodes

enhances the biocontrol activity of

Cryptococcus laurentii against

Penicillium expansum contamination

and patulin production in apple fruits.


Microbiology. 138:243-249. https: //doi

.org /10 .1016 /j.ij food

micro.2010.01.044

Vekiru, E., Hametner, C., Mitterbauer, R.,

Rechthaler, J., Adam, G., Schatzmayr,

G., Krska, R., and Schuhmacher, R.

2010. Cleavage of zearalenone by

Trichosporon mycotoxinivorans to a

novel nonestrogenic metabolite.

Applied and Environmental

Microbiology. 76(7):2353-2359.

https://doi: 10.1128/AEM.01438-09

Velmourougane, K., Bhat, R., Gopinandhan,

T.N., and Panneerselvam, P. 2011.

Management of Aspergillus ochraceus

and ochratoxin-A contamination in

coffee during on-farm processing

through commercial yeast inoculation.

Biological Control. 57:215-221. DOI: 10.

1016/j.biocontrol.2011.03.003

Zanon, MSA., Chiotta, ML., Giaj-Merlera, G.,

Barros, G., and Chulze, S. 2013.

Evaluation of potential biocontrol agent

for aflatoxin in Argentinean peanuts.




013.01.017

review: prevention and reduction of mycotoxin by

Documents